Smith v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

CourtUnited States Court of Federal Claims
DecidedFebruary 26, 2025
Docket23-1958V
StatusUnpublished

This text of Smith v. Secretary of Health and Human Services (Smith v. Secretary of Health and Human Services) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States Court of Federal Claims primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Smith v. Secretary of Health and Human Services, (uscfc 2025).

Opinion

$033&$5&%

In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 23-1958V

CLYDE SMITH, Chief Special Master Corcoran

Petitioner, Filed: January 15, 2025 v.

SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES,

Respondent.

William E. Cochran, Jr., Black McLaren Jones Ryland & Griffee, P.C., Memphis, TN , for Petitioner.

Rachelle Bishop, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.

DECISION ON JOINT STIPULATION 1

On November 6, 2023, Clyde Smith filed a petition for compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, 42 U.S.C. §300aa-10, et seq. 2 (the “Vaccine Act”). Petitioner alleges that he suffered a Table injury - shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (“SIRVA”) as a result of the administration of an influenza (“flu”) vaccination on October 11, 2022. Petition at 1; Stipulation, filed at January 8, 2025, ¶¶ 1- 2, 4. Petitioner further alleges that he received the vaccine in the United States, that he suffered the residual effects of his injury for more than six months, and that there has been no prior award or settlement of a civil action on his behalf as a result of his injury. See Petition at ¶¶ 2; 18-19; Stipulation at ¶¶ 3-5. “Respondent denies that [P]etitioner sustained a SIRVA Table injury; denies that the vaccine caused [P]etitioner’s alleged shoulder injury, or any other injury; and denies that his current condition is a sequela of a vaccine-related injury.” Stipulation at ¶ 6.

1 Because this Decision contains a reasoned explanation for the action taken in this case, it must be made

publicly accessible and will be posted on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website, and/or at https://www.govinfo.gov/app/collection/uscourts/national/cofc, in accordance with the E-Government Act of 2002. 44 U.S.C. § 3501 note (2018) (Federal Management and Promotion of Electronic Government Services). This means the Decision will be available to anyone with access to the internet. In accordance with Vaccine Rule 18(b), Petitioner has 14 days to identify and move to redact medical or other information, the disclosure of which would constitute an unwarranted invasion of privacy. If, upon review, I agree that the identified material fits within this definition, I will redact such material from public access. 2 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, Pub. L. No. 99-660, 100 Stat. 3755. Hereinafter, for ease

of citation, all section references to the Vaccine Act will be to the pertinent subparagraph of 42 U.S.C. § 300aa (2018). Nevertheless, on January 8, 2025, the parties filed the attached joint stipulation, stating that a decision should be entered awarding compensation. I find the stipulation reasonable and adopt it as my decision awarding damages, on the terms set forth therein.

Pursuant to the terms stated in the attached Stipulation, I award the following compensation:

A lump sum of $85,500.00 in the form of a check payable to Petitioner. Stipulation at ¶ 8. This amount represents compensation for all items of damages that would be available under Section 15(a). Id.

I approve the requested amount for Petitioner’s compensation. In the absence of a motion for review filed pursuant to RCFC Appendix B, the Clerk of Court is directed to enter judgment in accordance with this decision. 3

IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/Brian H. Corcoran Brian H. Corcoran Chief Special Master

3 Pursuant to Vaccine Rule 11(a), entry of judgment can be expedited by the parties’ joint filing of notice

renouncing the right to seek review.

2 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

CLYDE SMITH,

Petitioner, No. 23-1958V Chief Special Master Corcoran v. ECF

STIPULATION

The parties hereby stipulate to the following matters:

1. Clyde Smith (“petitioner”), filed a petition for vaccine compensation under the

National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-10 to -34 (the “Vaccine

Program”). The petition seeks compensation for injuries allegedly related to petitioner’s receipt

of an influenza (“flu”) vaccine, which is contained in the Vaccine Injury Table (the “Table”), 42

C.F.R. § 100.3(a)

2. Petitioner received a flu vaccine on October 11, 2022.

3. The vaccine was administered within the United States.

4. Petitioner alleges that he sustained a shoulder injury related to vaccine administration

(“SIRVA”) within the time period set forth in the Table. He further alleges that he experienced

the residual effects of this condition for more than six months.

5. Petitioner represents that there has been no prior award or settlement of a civil action

for damages on his behalf as a result of his alleged injury. 6. Respondent denies that petitioner sustained a SIRVA Table injury; denies that the

vaccine caused petitioner’s alleged shoulder injury, or any other injury; and denies that his

current condition is a sequela of a vaccine-related injury.

7. Maintaining their above-stated positions, the parties nevertheless now agree that the

issues between them shall be settled and that a decision should be entered awarding the

compensation described in paragraph 8 of this Stipulation.

8. As soon as practicable after an entry of judgment reflecting a decision consistent with

the terms of this Stipulation, and after petitioner has filed an election to receive compensation

pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-21(a)(1), the Secretary of Health and Human Services will issue

the following vaccine compensation payment:

A lump sum of $85,500.00 in the form of a check payable to petitioner. This amount represents compensation for all damages that would be available under 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(a).

9. As soon as practicable after the entry of judgment on entitlement in this case, and after

petitioner has filed both a proper and timely election to receive compensation pursuant to 42

U.S.C. § 300aa-21(a)(1), and an application, the parties will submit to further proceedings before

the special master to award reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs incurred in proceeding upon this

petition.

10. Petitioner and his attorney represent that compensation to be provided pursuant to

this Stipulation is not for any items or services for which the Program is not primarily liable

under 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(g), to the extent that payment has been made or can reasonably be

expected to be made under any State compensation programs, insurance policies, Federal or

State health benefits programs (other than Title XIX of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C.

§ 1396 et seq.)), or by entities that provide health services on a pre-paid basis.

2 11. Payment made pursuant to paragraph 8 and any amounts awarded pursuant to

paragraph 9 of this Stipulation will be made in accordance with 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(i), subject

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

§ 300aa
42 U.S.C. § 300aa
§ 300aa-10
42 U.S.C. § 300aa-10
§ 300aa-15
42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(a)
§ 300aa-21
42 U.S.C. § 300aa-21(a)(1)
Purposes
44 U.S.C. § 3501
§ 300a
42 U.S.C. § 300a

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Smith v. Secretary of Health and Human Services, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/smith-v-secretary-of-health-and-human-services-uscfc-2025.